W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > April to June 2004

Re: PATCH vs PUT w/Content-Range

From: Alex Rousskov <rousskov@measurement-factory.com>
Date: Wed, 28 Apr 2004 16:25:45 -0600 (MDT)
To: Lisa Dusseault <lisa@osafoundation.org>
Cc: HTTP working group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.58.0404281617460.91416@measurement-factory.com>


On Wed, 28 Apr 2004, Jamie Lokier wrote:

> Alex Rousskov wrote:
> > > I do mention one reason in the draft -- the problem of write-through
> > > caches.  The cache (if an intermediary) could see a PUT with a body and
> > > save the body as the new body for the resource, even though the PUT
> > > request body is only a diff or content range.
> >
> > Does anybody know of any implementation that caches PUT bodies?
>
> I don't know.
> It would be a violation of RFC 2616 (HTTP/1.1) section 13.10 though:

Yes, that is why I have doubts that "ranged PUT" is dangerous for the
reasons cited above. There may be other reasons, of course. And even
if ranged PUT is safe, there may be reasons to use a PATCH method.
Nevertheless, rationale should reflect reality.

Alex.
Received on Wednesday, 28 April 2004 18:25:48 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 27 April 2012 06:49:30 GMT